Supervised Visitation & Safe Exchange Programs: Cook County Centers Provide a “Safe Place” for Families to Connect

Access to Justice, Domestic Relations , , , , , ,

When a parent’s fitness is called into question by the court, particularly when there are concerns about intimate partner abuse or other forms of harmful behavior, courts may rely on communities’ supervised visitation programs to ensure that children have the opportunity to maintain contact with their non residential parent while simultaneously keeping all parties safe. In general, supervised visitation programs facilitate in-person visits with a parent and their child(ren) while under the supervision of a third party in an effort to provide a safe environment. Parents who rely on the services supervised visitation centers provide, many of whom are survivors of domestic violence, have identified the centers as a “safe place” that reduces fear while taking “the burden off of them.”

Supervised visitation programs may offer a variety of types of supervision services, like one-on-one supervision with a neutral monitor continuously present, or centers may offer group supervised visits in large rooms overseen by several neutral supervisors. Some community centers also offer supervised “safe exchanges,” where a third-party monitors the transfer of a child from one parent to the other during the exchanges.

A judge who orders supervised visitation may require supervised visitation temporarily or indefinitely. If allegations of abuse or claims of domestic violence are pending, a judge may require the accused parent to participate in supervised visitation as part of an order of protection. If no termination date of supervised visitation is established in the court’s order, parties must continually participate in the program until the court determines that the non-residential parent has demonstrated a change in circumstances and supervised child contact is no longer required.

Background & National Landscape

Nationally, supervised visitation programs have evolved with the help of federal legislation. Congress, which acknowledged the dire need for appropriate visitation and exchange services to protect family wellbeing, created the Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation and Safe Exchange Grant Program (Supervised Visitation Program) as part of the Violence Against Women Act (2000). The program was established to allow communities the opportunity to support people dealing with circumstances involving domestic violence, child abuse, sexual assault, or stalking. It is estimated that, nationally, “more than 10 million adults experience domestic violence annually.” Research also indicates that while around 31% of women will experience domestic violence in their lifetime, for Black women the likelihood is much greater, exceeding 40%.

Supervised Visitation Program grantees, funded by the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), were tasked with developing programs that made safety their highest priority while simultaneously addressing individual families’ needs. This focus shifted from the traditional approach, where the primary purpose of supervised visitation and exchange- specifically in domestic violence cases- was to keep children safe while permitting continued access by parents. Advocates for supervised visitation centers have stated how they have seen a “cultural shift” in their communities following the enactment of the Supervised Visitation Program because it provides a “model for how change can occur on the community level.”

Grants for the federal program were awarded to four demonstration sites, including the Bay Area, California; Chicago, Illinois; Kent, Washington; and the state of Michigan, whose subsequent beneficiaries were local public and private non-profit entities that provided services, including supervised visitation and safe exchange. While guiding principles were established to help direct grant sites in utilizing the best practices when offering these services to their communities, the impact of the demonstration sites was the development of national standards and protocol enhanced recording measures, community partnership, and the creation of specialized services. In 2013, per the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, the Supervised Visitation Program was replaced with a newer, more comprehensive grant program called the Justice for Families Program (JFF). JFF was an outgrowth of the grants awarded under the Supervised Visitation Program by the OVW, thus furthering the principles required of the Supervised Visitation Program.

Programs in Chicago and Cook County

The City of Chicago entered into a contract with three local supervised visitation and safe exchange centers and, over the four years of the Supervised Visitation Program, Chicago’s centers have served over 500 families. A total of 4,970 supervised visits and 2,569 safe exchanges were provided to families impacted by domestic violence. Initially, the three centers in the city that provided these services were: Apna Ghar, The Branch Family Institute (Branch), and Mujeres Latinas en Acción. While Apna Ghar and Mujeres Latinas en Acción still provide these services in the city, the Branch was replaced by the Metropolitan Family Services program, called Midway Connections. The centers are located in different neighborhoods throughout the city and seek to serve their community members at no cost:

Apna Ghar, Mujeres Latina en Acción, and Midway Connections also serve as safe alternative locations for parents to pick up and drop off their children when the court has decided that a non-residential parent may participate in unsupervised visitation. Supervised visitation and safe exchange programs allow children to maintain and build upon their relationship with their non-residential parents after they’ve been exposed to violence or other harmful behavior.

Currently, the development of a fourth supervised visitation program in Cook County is underway at Loyola University Chicago. Leslie Landis, a Project Manager on Justice for Families Award who was interviewed for this article, has been assisting Loyola’s Center for Urban Research and Learning (CURL) to establish their supervised visitation services as part of the national JFF program. According to Landis, Loyola’s program intends to work in direct collaboration with the courts while seeking to serve all community members, apparent through its lack of requiring one parent to reside in Cook County.

Relationship to the Court System

One of the overarching goals of centers that provide supervised visitation services is to create a network that supports families while simultaneously creating a safe environment where children may interact with their non-residential parent. Supervised visitation is a tool that can be crucial to avoid further incidents of domestic violence and harmful behavior. However, it is important to note that centers that elect to provide these services are not arms of the court; Leslie Landis explains that while they rely on the courts for referrals to their programs, the services provided are independent of the court. According to the Circuit Court of Cook County, each agency strives to “provide safe, culturally sensitive services in an environment free of violence, where non-custodial parents can visit, or safely exchange, children for visitation, in accordance with a court order.”

Agency Capacity & Family Self-Determination

The benefits of courts utilizing supervised visitation programs can be understood, but many organizations that offer these programs have long waiting lists because of a limited supply of providers and, therefore, a lack of capacity. Unsurprisingly, this holds true for Cook County. Because of the lack of capacity, many issues arise for those who seek to access these services once they’re ordered by the court. Issues stemming from capacity are challenging to address because families participating in these programs are often served for extended periods, Leslie Landis explains. This is why growing the number of centers that provide these services is increasingly important and impactful.

Although some national standards and practices seek to guide centers that offer supervised visitation services, it is also important for communities to have autonomy and self-determination as they engage with centers’ staff and evaluate current practices.  Additional safe exchange and supervised visitation centers must be community-based and culturally appropriate. Inspire for Social Change which was created by individuals who directed supervised visitation programs in California. This program is a federally supported OVW technical assistance provider for agencies who offer supervised visitation services under an OVW grant award, according to Landis. Inspire for Social Change is a proponent of the notion that these types of services must be provided thoughtfully in consideration of participants differing identities, experiences, cultures, and expectations. Inspire for Social Change believes that the key elements of an agency’s external policy must account for the unique needs and risks of each family served, which is accomplished by creating policies and procedures that support the individualized concerns and meet each family’s needs.

As mentioned, the OVW has adopted the Safe Haven guiding principles for those who received a grant under the Supervised Visitation Program to incorporate into the administration of their services. For example, there must be equal regard for the safety of children and adult victims. Safety for these parties must be a primary concern. In order to ensure that there is a separation of parents while on-site and to avoid the likelihood of contact between the parties, security measures and protocols should be established that address the various safety needs of the families. Making sure all parties have a fair and respectful experience is very important. It is pivotal that centers and their staff understand domestic violence and the dynamics it creates in order to incorporate this knowledge into their services. Agencies should also be responsive to the background, circumstances, and culture of their community and the families they serve. An emphasis on the value of multiculturalism and diversity when providing their services is essential, and such can be incorporated by offering services in a multitude of languages, depending on the community’s needs; community collaboration is crucial to the success of these programs.

Planning for the Future

Despite the many strengths these agencies in Cook County possess, improvements and modifications are needed. For example, advocates note that there are many problems concerning timing and uniformity among the centers in the city. A more streamlined and systematic process is desperately needed. Moreover, complications surrounding timing and the lack of availability when families are ordered to pursue these programs can only be addressed by an increase in capacity. While the development of a fourth center at Loyola will hopefully help alleviate some of the problems related to capacity and timing, its center, too, will likely be overrun considering it lacks the residency requirements that other county centers possess. Court systems in the surrounding suburbs are already anticipating utilizing the resources Loyola’s center will provide; thus, it is unlikely that the opening of this one additional center will make a difference significant enough to reduce the strain of resources on the others in the county.

Leslie Landis explains that there is a need for improving the way these centers interact with the court system. Loyola hopes to establish a robust way of referral that all of the centers in the county may rely on; it recognizes the need for a limit on the amount of information shared between centers and the courts. There must be a standardized way of relaying information from the court to the visitation programs, and vice versa, while acknowledging that these centers are not arms of the court.

Despite their imperfections, it is apparent that the centers that offer supervised visitation throughout Cook County strive to provide their services in accordance with national standards and guiding principles. The centers possess clear mission statements that clearly articulate their organization’s purpose when providing their services. These statements express their commitment to providing comprehensive services to families in their community, with a particular focus on children and adult victims. Likewise, within each of the three centers’ mission and purpose is a statement detailing their dedication to diversity. Still, it is important to note that these conclusions are drawn merely based on the centers’ websites; it is quite possible that, in practice, participants have a very different experience.

There has yet to be a broad, full-scale embrace of these services as a coordinated community response to domestic violence. In other words, there has not been wide scale acceptance within the larger domestic violence advocacy community, and there  remains a greater need for these services to be readily available to all its community members. While the benefits of providing supervised visitation services are crucial to the safety of children and adult victims of domestic and gender-based violence, these services must also provide access to restorative and therapeutic practices for those who have done harm. Accordingly, there is an extensive need for a proliferation of centers that provide these services. Supervised visitation and safe exchange services are a necessity to support all members of the community.

Alexa Cataland (she/her) is a third-year law student at Tulane University Law School and a Public Interest Law Initiative (PILI) Intern with Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts. She is currently the Research Editor for the Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law. In the fall, she will serve as a student attorney with Tulane’s Domestic Violence Clinic and its collaborative project, the Women’s Prison Project.